IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA. NO: 213/AHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) SHRI ALAP SOMABHAI PATEL 13, SUBHASH SOCIETY B/H. ISHWAR BHUVAN, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD-380009 V/S THE ITO, WARD 8(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AETPP8910M APPELLANT BY : SHRI DHIREN SHAH, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JAMES KURIAN, SR. D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 21 -02-201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-02-2017 PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. WITH THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE C ORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XVI, AHMEDABAD DATED 11.11.2013 P ERTAINING TO A.Y. 2009- 10. ITA NO213/AH D/2014 . A.Y. 2009-10 2 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE A DDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND AMOUNTING TO RS. 8.30 LACS. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED LOANS AND ADVANCES F ROM FOUR PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANIES WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF THE DIRECTOR AND HAVING SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST. 4. THE A.O. ISSUED THE SHOW CAUSE TO THE ASSESSEE ASKI NG HIM TO EXPLAIN WHY THE LOANS/ADVANCES TAKEN FROM THE FOUR PRIVATE LIMI TED COMPANIES WHERE HE IS A DIRECTOR BE NOT TREATED AS DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. 5. IN HIS REPLY, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE SAID ADV ANCES AND LOANS WERE FOR PURCHASE OF LAND AND DUE TO SOME LITIGATION, THE DE AL COULD NOT BE FINALIZED. THEREFORE, THE SAME CANNOT BE TREATED AS DEEMED DIV IDEND. THE A.O. DISMISSED THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND PROCEEDED BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 8.30 LACS MADE U/S. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. 6. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. 7. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERA TED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE A.O. THE LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE FINDI NGS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. ITA NO213/AH D/2014 . A.Y. 2009-10 3 8. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORD ERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE FACTS EMANATING FROM THE ORDERS OF THE A UTHORITIES BELOW SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN LOAN/ADVANCE FROM THE F OLLOWING FOUR PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANIES WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING SU BSTANTIAL INTEREST:- SR. NO. NAME OF COMPANY APPELLANT' S SHARE HOLDING LOANS & ADVANCES 1 SOM ALAP FARMS PVT.LTD. 29% 2,90,00 0 2 SOM MAULIK FARMS PVT.LTD. 30% 1,60,000 3 SOMHI FARMS PVT.LTD. 30% 2,10,000 4 SOMSUNDER FARMS PVT.LTD. 30% 1,70,000 9. A PERUSAL OF THE AFORE-STATED CHART SHOWS THAT THER E IS NO DISPUTE THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT SQUARELY APPLY ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND. THOUGH, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT THE SAID LOANS/ADVANCES WERE FOR PURCHASE OF LAND BUT NO CON CRETE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD NEITHER BEFORE THE LOWER AUT HORITIES NOR BEFORE US. THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAI M OF THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS UN SUBSTANTIATED; THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FIN DINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). ITA NO213/AH D/2014 . A.Y. 2009-10 4 10. APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 23- 02- 20 17 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER TRUE COPY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 23/02/2017 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD